Pancho wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On 1/2/25 20:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>> design choice.
>
> I agree. I started using Gnome in 2014, it changed the way I use MS
> Windows. Menus tend to be arbitrary, very difficult to find stuff. A
> short task bar of frequently used apps and text search for other stuff
> is much better.

I like Fluxbox; you can extend it's built-in menus with easy to grok
text files. And you can tear off a sub-menu, leaving it floating on the
desktop for easy access.

But for running apps I use the command line or create some hotkeys
using xbindkeys and the fluxbox keys file.

Also helpful are cdargs and GNU readline.

THere are other tools, such as dmenu, that I don't use.

https://www.sglavoie.com/posts/2019/11/10/using-dmenu-to-optimize-common-tasks/

dmenu is one of those tools that look a little unimpressive at first but
can accomplish so much! It’s a program that you can use to receive any
output redirected from other programs (through pipes in the terminal, the
symbol |) and treat that output so that it can pop up within a simple menu
to make it available for execution. If you want to know more about other
fantastic tools from suckless.org, I went over some of them before, such as
the st terminal and slock, a dead simple screen locker.

But obviously many users will simply use the desktop-provided options.

--
Say my love is easy had,
Say I'm bitten raw with pride,
Say I am too often sad --
Still behold me at your side.
Say I'm neither brave nor young,
Say I woo and coddle care,
Say the devil touched my tongue --
Still you have my heart to wear.
But say my verses do not scan,
And I get me another man!
-- Dorothy Parker, "Fighting Words"

Carlos E.R. wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On 2025-01-02 21:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>> design choice.
>
> What if you are new and don't know the name of the applications?

As time goes on, *some* will learn.

--
There be sober men a'plenty, and drunkards barely twenty; there are men
of over ninety who have never yet kissed a girl. But give me the rambling
rover, from Orkney down to Dover, we will roam the whole world over, and
together we'll face the world. -- Andy Stewart, "After the Hush"

186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> (snipped, unread)

On 1/3/25 10:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-01-02 21:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and
>>>> offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>> design choice.
>>
>
> What if you are new and don't know the name of the applications?
>
>

The text search matches keywords associated with the application, not
just a perfect match on the application name.

In Gnome, an application installation can include a Gnome .desktop file
under /usr/share/applications/.

I think MS Windows gives a similar fuzzy match, but I'm not sure how
they do it.

On 2025-01-03 12:16, D wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and offers a
>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>
>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>
> I've been running XFCE for at least a decade and I for me it is a nice
> sweet spot of a more comprehensive desktop environment that is also
> fairly light on resources.
>
> I do not use the menu system, but only a keyboard launcher instead.

I switched to XFCE when Gnome went into version 3. Not sure it is 3, but
when they changed the paradigm and killed the menu.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> D wrote:
>>
>> No I think it is just because someone pulled in comp.os.linux.advocacy.
>> Seems a lot of trolls reside there. I looked into it, found it way to
>> annoying, and stopped. But I got a reminder of why I stopped reading
>> that group.

That's rather ironic, coming from someone who thinks that it "sounded"
like I admitted defeat, because I temporarily ignored someone who had
just attacked me without basis.

How is defeat even possible, when I was so clearly in the right?

>Yup. Ain't that the truth.
>
>Linux is good all by itself. Doesn't need advocacy.

About Linux, you are correct.

Your response, if any, will be deleted, unread.

On 1/3/25 6:52 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/01/2025 11:45, D wrote:
>> No I think it is just because someone pulled in
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy. Seems a lot of trolls reside there. I looked
>> into it, found it way to annoying, and stopped. But I got a reminder
>> of why I stopped reading that group.
>
> Yup. Ain't that the truth.

Yup, its a product of crossposting. Things change and USENET just
doesn't have the audience it did 30 years ago to have groups have
sufficient critical mass to sustain (on- or off-topic) dialogs/

> Linux is good all by itself. Doesn't need advocacy.

Its a tool like anything else, so use the right tool for the job.

Advocates in COLA have historically fight against the wisdom of
understanding that everything has its own strengths & weaknesses,
swimming against uses where other solutions are better.

For example, take a new digital camera: wouldn't it be nice to not have
to wait a year to read its new RAW file format? Most folk just want
pics, so they choose a platform where its supported on launch, not to
have to sit down to DIY write & test a 3rd party driver first.

Meantime, my New Year's Resolution is to tweak my Linux NAS; seems that
it needs a better RAM cache to not bottleneck on network, and those
parts are due to arrive this weekend. I'll have to look around to see if
I have some spare NVMEs to change up its disk cache while I'm at it too.
If that doesn't resolve things, then its probably time to look to some
network gear to move some nodes from 1GbE to 10GbE.

-hh

186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> OpenSUSE is also great - but I'm worried about how
> it uses the now IBM-owned sources.

Are you saing that they use source code that is owned by IBM and not
released under any open-source license?

--
"Almost no one in user land gives a flying fuck about an open and free
kernel." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

On 1/3/25 3:45 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 08:10:24 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> I owned (own?) Photoshop 6 (or 5?) back in the mid 2000s. Bought used on
>> eBay, I think. I messed with it for a few hours and decided it wasn't my
>> "cup of tea," and gave up on it. They talk about GIMP becoming
>> complicated.
>> What did they think Photoshop was... a walk in the park? If I remember
>> correctly, Photoshop 5 or 6 didn't look a lot different than GIMP.
>
> I had something way way back.

I've lost track of versions.
Checking Wiki, Photoshop 5 was 1998; 6 was 2000.
The end of non-subscription was CS6 (v13) in 2012).

> All I remember was almost developing carpal
> tunnel screwing around with pixels. I don't have the greatest hand/eye
> coordination which is a real drawback for video games and image editing.

A lot of the sophistication (& differentiation) in PS was through its
use of Layers, particularly for making selective exposure adjustments.
It made for a pretty steep learning curve, and "non-photography" based
use cases never had much need to learn these sections.

-hh

On 1/3/25 7:07 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/01/2025 11:58, -hh wrote:
>> On 1/3/25 6:32 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Jan 2025, Lars Poulsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2025-01-02, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/
>>>>>
>>>>> What isn't 'woke' these days? The language is over the top but does
>>>>> the
>>>>> end result really differ from civilized behavior in the workplace?
>>>>
>>>> The problem seems to be that some a**holes NEED to be smacked with
>>>> regulations before they will live up to basic civility. And then they
>>>> complain about "woke tyranny".
>>>>
>>>
>>> That might be true. It is also true that some people are severely and
>>> unjustly punished for being conservative christians, pro-Trump, or
>>> just plain conservative.
>>
>> These actions you're defending as 'unjust' were things like killing
>> someone because they happened to be gay/black/different, right?
>>
>
> No.
> It means losing your career and livelihood because you said that women
> don't have a penis.

I'm not disputing that such claims have been made, nor that the one
stating it got berated, but we do need to look beyond the superficial
media sound bite to see what the more complete context has been.

For example, much of these trans- topics have been distractions from a
basic principle, such as "but don't they have rights too?": the whole
flamewar on this in college sports: the NCAA chair recently testified
to Congress and revealed that there's ten (10) trans NCAA athletes in
question. With this so-called "problem" being just ten kids, don't you
think that this topic has been blown way out of proportion?

There's certainly been more than just ten kids who have been denied
opportunity for some equally trivial & wrong reason too by some coach
somewhere who doesn't like their curly hair, accent, a sibling, etc.
Put blame on the individuals being assholes, not principles of equality.

> Or because you said that Mohammed wasn't a very nice person, after all.
> Or losing an eye because of that.

Also no 'woke', because physical assault has been illegal for centuries.

Now while on this topic, why can Christians shove their religious texts
down everyone's throats? Can you identify which Constitution Amendment
made this form of Christianity our one & only official religion? Or is
the actual problem here that some fundamental Christians have chosen to
become flaming assholes intolerant of all others?

> Or losing your career and livelihood because you failed to endorse
> wokery in every performance and every film play or radio drama that you
> were involved in.

But Theater has been a haven for 'misfits' of society for decades, so
why are you trying to disrespect/destroy that subculture they've built?
Are you going to deride D&D players for the same reasons too?

Or Hunters? Powerboat owners? Because there's a million subcultures
that one can attack when you really are determined to be an asshole.

> Or losing your career and livelihood because you failed to endorse 'man
> made climate change'.

Sea levels have already risen by 4 inches since 1993, and hard science
has found the primary energy imbalance reason why: its anthropometric.

>> There's extreme cases of assholitry that have no place in Society; the
>> question is how to establish a fair, uniform and transparent standard
>> that won't be abused by those who's personal biases make them prone to
>> being an abuser (see religious leaders & pedophilia for YA example).
>>
> Abolish woke.

Abolish assholes ... it is the more direct & obvious solution.

> Make it perfectly legal to think anything and say anything that is not a
> direct incitement to public violence.

It already is. What you're trying to do is to separate Freedom of
Speech from Freedom from Consequences.

> Battle racism by repealing  all laws that diifferentiate  between ethnic
> groups

The challenge is how to identify, quantify & make amendments for decades
of systematic advantages granted to straight white protestant men, as
the current generation has had both direct plus indirect benefits
through their forefathers.

Change can occur though, by leading by example: demand that all cops who
have pulled over any "driving while black" motorists be fired, stripped
of pension & blacklisted from ever working a job in law enforcement ever
again.

> Let society, not the Law, judge whether a man in a summer frock is
> really a woman or just a sick saddo.

Let Society mind their own damn business by not demanding to peek under
that individual's frock to begin with.

-hh

On 2025-01-03 03:10, RonB wrote:

>> I used to have Photoshop Elements on the Mac; I never used it. Since
>> then, I've practically never needed to use such an application. If I
>> have, Paint.net or GIMP did the job. I have yet to sit in the corner of
>> a room holding my knees and crying because I didn't have Photoshop
>> installed.
>
> I owned (own?) Photoshop 6 (or 5?) back in the mid 2000s. Bought used on
> eBay, I think. I messed with it for a few hours and decided it wasn't my
> "cup of tea," and gave up on it. They talk about GIMP becoming complicated.
> What did they think Photoshop was... a walk in the park? If I remember
> correctly, Photoshop 5 or 6 didn't look a lot different than GIMP.

If I'm not mistaken, the GIMP interface was inspired by the Photoshop
one. If you're familiar with the latter, you should have no trouble with
the former. There are definitely some features missing, but it shouldn't
be unfamiliar.

>>> Whoop dee do. If I
>>> actually needed to use Photoshop (I don't) than I would install it (or rent
>>> it, or however you use it now) on either a Mac or Windows machine.
>>> Non-problem solved. I would venture to guess that the vast majority of
>>> Windows users don't use Photoshop either.
>>
>> They don't. The only people using it and/or requiring it work in the
>> field of photography or image manipulation. I would bet that most of us
>> don't even know people that work in the former or latter fields.
>
> I've only ever been around Photoshop at the print shop where I worked
> (except for my short and lame attempt at learning it). If it's a tool you
> need, by all means get it. I'm guessing the Windows or Mac computer you
> would need to run it would be cheaper to buy than the Photoshop application
> itself. To pretend it's a reason NOT to use Linux is absurd and extreme
> clutching at straws.

In the end, GIMP and Photoshop save to the same formats. If I'm not
mistaken, if you start a project with Photoshop, you can finish it with
GIMP or vice versa. With that in mind, your print shop wouldn't have
even needed to load the software onto any of its computers to help
someone who wanted to put their Photoshop project on paper. Still, I
don't think I know of a single person among my students, friends or
family who actually use image-manipulation software. Telling them that
they won't be able to use Photoshop wouldn't have any effect on their
use of an operating system.

>> Here is an argument for using software under Linux: you don't need to
>> create an account to download the software, and don't need to create
>> another to use it. In fact, you don't need to identify yourself at all
>> to use your computer.
>
> The few times I've used GIMP it's done what I needed it to do. I don't
> manipulate photos much (or hardly at all). It would be a total waste of my
> money to rent Photoshop. (I think the hobbyists who do rent it, probably use
> it sparingly, i.e., they're basically wasting their money.) But that's their
> prerogative.
>
> Even taking away the cost factor from Windows software, it's a pain in the
> butt to keep registered and (even when you can buy it) upgrades are often
> expensive.
>
> For example, I bought Fade In, proprietary screenwriting software that works
> in Linux, Windows and Macs for $80 a few years ago. Its license allows me to
> use it on as many computers as I want, in any combination of Windows, Linux
> or Macs. (I've tested it on Windows and Macs, but I use it in Linux.) Since
> I bought it there has been one major upgrade from v3 to v4 and many small
> point upgrades. I have never paid for a single upgrade.
>
> Compare it to Final Draft (which doesn't work on Linux), which costs $250
> (usually on sale for about $200, sometimes cheaper). It comes with a license
> that allows it to be used on three computers (only for one platform). You
> buy the Windows version, it only works on Windows, same with the Mac
> version, only Macs. You have to activate your licenses via the Internet. If
> you want to put it on another computer (and you're out of activations), you
> have to deactivate it from the old computer and activate it on the new one.
> If your computer crashes, you've lost one of your activations. You can get
> it back by requesting it and hoping they believe you. That is, you can get
> it back IF the version of your Final Draft is new enough to still be
> supported. If you're using an older version of Final Draft and it
> deactivates for whatever reason, you're shit out of luck. They'll offer to
> sell you an upgrade for $100. If you're using an older Mac computer (for
> example) and it's not supported by the newer version of Final Draft, again,
> you're shit out of luck. Many writers upgrade every time Final Draft comes
> out with a new version, at $100 a pop. Then there's a whole slew of serious
> issues reports for about a year because Final Draft (like Microsoft) uses
> their buyers as beta testers. And, like Microsoft, it takes forever to get a
> bug fix.
>
> Compare that to Fade In. Somebody on Reddit wanted a feature. I got hold of
> the publisher, in three days there was a new version of Fade In with the new
> feature added. The publisher of Fade In is also a screenwriter. Final Draft
> is owned by a corporation and Final Draft is a side business for them. And
> since they're the self-proclaimed "standard," they have the "take it or
> leave it" attitude. Not surprisingly a lot of people are moving to Fade In
> (and several other lesser known applications) — including my favorite,
> Trelby — which has just gotten a new release and it's completely free and
> open.
>
> (Yeah, I rambled. Sorry.)

Trust me, I ramble about such things too. I can't stand the activation
scheme even though I understand why commercial software uses it. I
rarely have issues activating nowadays and the software will actually
tell me that it needs to disable it on the previous installation to
install on the new one, but I would routinely have issues back in the
day with Windows XP. Whenever I changed any piece of hardware, I would
have to call Microsoft and speak to some baboon who would give me a code
to re-activate the software I paid for. Eventually, they automated the
process because I imagine that the company got sick of the baboons too.
I'm surprised that I didn't get sufficiently annoyed by the process back
then to move full time to Linux since I can't stand the process today.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-03 03:34, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 00:49:59 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> Find an old International Harvester truck ... SOLID steel all
>> through. Parts may be tricky though ...
>
> My '86 F-150 is reasonably solid. I was sitting in it reading in a parking
> lot when a woman trying to park backed into it. I didn't even bother to
> get out to see if she'd done any damage. That was the front bumper. If
> she'd backed into the step,n,tow bumper on the rear her problems might
> have been greater.

I had a similar experience a week or so ago. I was sitting in a
supermarket parking lot in my new QX60 when the daughter of the guy who
parked to the left of me decided to open her car door wide and smack my
vehicle. She freaked out when she noticed that I was in the car, had
these wide eyes and couldn't think of doing anything but motion her
hands and say "sorry." I bet that she wouldn't have cared whatsoever had
I not been in the car. I looked at her and uttered something in French
saying that a sorry wouldn't be enough and got out of my car. When she
saw my size, she got into her car and cowered where her dad ripped into
her and asked whether she had actually damaged anything. Luckily for
both of them, she had only transferred her dad's cheap Dodge paint onto
my car and I was able to easily wipe it off.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-03 05:43, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-01-02 21:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and
>>>> offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>> design choice.
>>
>
> What if you are new and don't know the name of the applications?

Then you do what we all did and scour through the applications (eithjer
in the menu or the pile of unsorted applications) until you find what
you're looking for. After a while, you find it and remember its name.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-03 06:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 02/01/2025 20:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and
>>>> offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>
>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>> design choice.
>>
> Odd, since MATE - a superset of GNOME - expects you to use a menu. Its
> very XP like.
>
> And since XP was what I was running when I switched entirely to Linux, I
> didn't have to relearn very much at all..

We are talking about GNOME _now_ not then.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 03/01/2025 13:32, -hh wrote:
> Sea levels have already risen by 4 inches since 1993, and hard science
> has found the primary energy imbalance reason why:  its anthropometric.

Sea level rise has been 3mm/yr for the last 4000 years. Nothing has changed

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On 03/01/2025 13:56, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
> On 2025-01-03 06:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 02/01/2025 20:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and
>>>>> they
>>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and
>>>>> offers a
>>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>>
>>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>>
>>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I
>>> do it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>>> design choice.
>>>
>> Odd, since MATE - a superset of GNOME - expects you to use a menu. Its
>> very XP like.
>>
>> And since XP was what I was running when I switched entirely to Linux,
>> I didn't have to relearn very much at all..
>
> We are talking about GNOME _now_ not then.
>
Fairy Nuff. I have no idea what it is now, but MATE is still built on
gnome3 libraries AFAIK
And was a sort of fork of gnome2 desktop

--
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

On 2025-01-03 07:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/01/2025 11:58, -hh wrote:
>> On 1/3/25 6:32 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Jan 2025, Lars Poulsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2025-01-02, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/
>>>>>
>>>>> What isn't 'woke' these days? The language is over the top but does
>>>>> the
>>>>> end result really differ from civilized behavior in the workplace?
>>>>
>>>> The problem seems to be that some a**holes NEED to be smacked with
>>>> regulations before they will live up to basic civility. And then they
>>>> complain about "woke tyranny".
>>>>
>>>
>>> That might be true. It is also true that some people are severely and
>>> unjustly punished for being conservative christians, pro-Trump, or
>>> just plain conservative.
>>
>> These actions you're defending as 'unjust' were things like killing
>> someone because they happened to be gay/black/different, right?
>>
>
> No.
> It means losing your career and livelihood because you said that women
> don't have a penis.
> Or because you said that Mohammed wasn't a very nice person, after all.
> Or losing an eye because of that.
> Or losing your career and livelihood because you failed to endorse
> wokery in every performance and every film play or radio drama that you
> were involved in.
> Or losing your career and livelihood because you failed to endorse 'man
> made climate change'.
>
>
>> There's extreme cases of assholitry that have no place in Society; the
>> question is how to establish a fair, uniform and transparent standard
>> that won't be abused by those who's personal biases make them prone to
>> being an abuser (see religious leaders & pedophilia for YA example).
>>
> Abolish woke.
>
> Make it perfectly legal to think anything and say anything that is not a
> direct incitement to public violence.
>
> Battle racism by repealing  all laws that diifferentiate  between ethnic
> groups
>
> Let society, not the Law, judge whether a man in a summer frock is
> really a woman or just a sick saddo.

+1

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-03 07:11, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> On 2025-01-02 21:06, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-02 14:42, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and offers a
>>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>>
>>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>>
>>> GNOME was designed with the belief that anyone looking for an
>>> application will press the Windows key and then type the name of what
>>> they're looking for rather than select it from a menu. That's how I do
>>> it whether I use Windows, GNOME or KDE so I would agree with their
>>> design choice.
>>
>> What if you are new and don't know the name of the applications?
>
> As time goes on, *some* will learn.

No, most will. I agree that most people have the memory of a fruit fly,
but I imagine that if they installed Linux in the first place, they're
probably brighter.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-03 07:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-01-03 12:16, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:36:41 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find GNOME rather clunky whereas KDE, at least on Fedora and Nobara,
>>>> is perfect out of the box. I imagine that a lot of people who try out
>>>> Linux and face GNOME are going to wonder how to do the basics, and they
>>>> will likely find that the way extensions work is rather clunky,
>>>> especially during upgrades. Meanwhile, KDE is very familiar and
>>>> offers a
>>>> ton of features they could only dream of in Windows like the desktop
>>>> effects, theming options and widgets. Unlike Cinnamon too, the widgets
>>>> in KDE actually work as they should.
>>>
>>> The Ubuntu box has GNOME. I live with it but I'm not a fan. I'd rather
>>> have a menu structure rather than the 'Show Applications' button that
>>> brings up three or four screens of unsorted stuff.
>>>
>>
>> I've been running XFCE for at least a decade and I for me it is a nice
>> sweet spot of a more comprehensive desktop environment that is also
>> fairly light on resources.
>>
>> I do not use the menu system, but only a keyboard launcher instead.
>
> I switched to XFCE when Gnome went into version 3. Not sure it is 3, but
> when they changed the paradigm and killed the menu.

That was 3. You did the right thing at the time since it would take a
while before that new interface was truly usable.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 12:42:31 +0100
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> OpenAI are good at marketing. They will probably crash the second
> their models do no longer improve.

Sooner than that, possibly. They're absolutely *hemorrhaging* money,
every iteration of the product takes longer and costs more to develop/
"train," they're bucking for the mother of all IP-infringement suits
when the corporate media behemoths finally catch up with them (anyone
gets "Sora" to produce a Disney character, and you might as well just
head for the fallout shelter,) "hallucinations" are still essentially
unsolvable given the way the thing works, and it still can't do *half*
of what they keep promising it will Real Soon Now.

Ed Zitron - https://www.wheresyoured.at/ - has done a lot of solid
writing on this in the last year or two. If they didn't have a bunch of
vulture capitalists constantly pumping the money firehose in hopes of
selling it to CEOs on the prospect of being able to fire all their
employees and replace them with ChatGPT, they'dve been dead and buried
long ago.

The Natural Philosopher wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On 03/01/2025 13:32, -hh wrote:
>> Sea levels have already risen by 4 inches since 1993, and hard science
>> has found the primary energy imbalance reason why:  its anthropometric.
>
> Sea level rise has been 3mm/yr for the last 4000 years. Nothing has changed

This source disagrees:

https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/ancient-seas/sea-level-rise

Also, sea level is *not* the same all over the world. The article mentions that
as well.

It's an interesting read.

--
Nietzsche is pietzsche, but Schiller is killer, and Goethe is moethe.

On 03/01/2025 16:31, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> On 03/01/2025 13:32, -hh wrote:
>>> Sea levels have already risen by 4 inches since 1993, and hard science
>>> has found the primary energy imbalance reason why:  its anthropometric.
>>
>> Sea level rise has been 3mm/yr for the last 4000 years. Nothing has changed
>
> This source disagrees:
>
> https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/ancient-seas/sea-level-rise
>
> Also, sea level is *not* the same all over the world. The article mentions that
> as well.
>
> It's an interesting read.
>
Well I will merely quote from the Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level

"Sea level has changed over geologic time. As the graph shows, sea level
today is very near the *lowest level ever attained* (the lowest level
occurred at the Permian-Triassic boundary about 250 million years ago)."

"Recently, it has become widely accepted that late Holocene, 3,000
calendar years ago to present, sea level was nearly stable prior to an
acceleration of rate of rise that is variously dated between 1850 and
1900 AD."

*Long before any CO2 excess was present*.

--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

On 1/3/25 11:43 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/01/2025 16:31, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>>
>>> On 03/01/2025 13:32, -hh wrote:
>>>> Sea levels have already risen by 4 inches since 1993, and hard science
>>>> has found the primary energy imbalance reason why:  its anthropometric.
>>>
>>> Sea level rise has been 3mm/yr for the last 4000 years. Nothing has
>>> changed
>>
>> This source disagrees:
>>
>>      https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/ancient-seas/sea-level-rise
>>
>> Also, sea level is *not* the same all over the world. The article
>> mentions that
>> as well.
>>
>> It's an interesting read.
>
> Well I will merely quote from the Wiki:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level
>
> "Sea level has changed over geologic time. As the graph shows, sea level
> today is very near the *lowest level ever attained*  (the lowest level
> occurred at the Permian-Triassic boundary about 250 million years ago)."
>
> "Recently, it has become widely accepted that late Holocene, 3,000
> calendar years ago to present, sea level was nearly stable prior to an
> acceleration of rate of rise that is variously dated between 1850 and
> 1900 AD."
>
> *Long before any CO2 excess was present*.

Yes, the rate of raise was nearly stable **before** the Industrial Age.

Which is the point: the contemporary acceleration in the rate of rise
is a change, and it is coincident with the advent of the Industrial Age.

Overall, sea level is kind of like driving down the highway: it doesn't
particularly matter if the speed limit is 55 or 65: what matters is
when there's a rapid rate of change.

When we look at the timescale of rates of change, we find that over the
past 2000 years, the last 150 years stand out:

[quote]
Stable sea level from 200 BC until 1000 AD
A 400-year rise by about 6 cm per century up to 1400 AD
Another stable period from 1400 AD up to the late 19th C
A rapid rise by about 20 cm since.
[/quote]

TL;DR KISS:
~1200 years of ~0.0 mm/yr
~400 years of +0.6 mm/yr
~450 years of: -0.1 mm/yr
~1850-present: +2.1 mm/yr

<https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/06/2000-years-of-sea-level/>

Doing the math, the history is ~195mm over 2000 years = +0.1 mm/yr,
which means that today's 2.1 mm/yr is a 20x greater rate of change.

-hh

On 2025-01-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 02/01/2025 20:04, rbowman wrote:
>> What isn't 'woke' these days? The language is over the top but does the
>> end result really differ from civilized behavior in the workplace?
>
> Yes. Absolutely it does.
>
> Civilised behaviour is a culture of tolerance. Woke is a culture of
> vicious intolerance towards anyone who challenges a narrow definition of
> a modern Puritanism.
>
> Civilised behaviour doesn't get you fired. Civilised behaviour doesn't
> get you blacklisted.
>
> Woke is part of the reason Trump will be president. People don't like
> being told what to think. This isn't Putin's Russia.
>
>
+1
Well stated.

pH

On 2025-01-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Woke is part of the reason Trump will be president. People don't like
> being told what to think. This isn't Putin's Russia.

People might not like being told what to think, but many of them
_love_ telling other people what to think. Any leader who promises
to do this for them is a shoo-in, and they will be happy until the
inevitable day when said leader tries to tell _them_ what to think.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey